Again I urge you to read the Sermon on the Mount that is found in the Gospel book written by St. Matthew from chapters 5 to 7 of the Bible. You will notice that the preaching of Jesus Christ is easy to understand but difficult to practice!
I will be happy to discuss subsequently. I am sure you will also understand my second sentence also after your reading.
Be blessed
My Rebuttal against the idea that a Soldier cannot be a Christian:
They were the army of worshippers unlike offensive system of a secular governments!
Prayerful people are different from secular army with their war thirsty machinery.
A person in possession of a sword is considered as a transgressor.
I don't plan to die by a sword! Grace doesn't save deliberate sinners nor transgressors!
Contemporary misconception, as is with many, is that by Grace we are still allowed to sin deliberately and grace will simply and continually cover those sins...Bible says otherwise.
Here are the statements of people who have not thought out their stance on the subject of pacifism (the idea in opposition to acts of violence in order to settle a dispute). For they broaden their phylacteries by loosely throwing around the Scriptures and lengthen the tassels of their garments by spewing out Christian clichés to prove their point (Matthew 23:5). Clearly you are blind guides with dulled senses; you cannot tell an apple from an orange.
There are two warfares being waged in the world today: the spiritual and the physical. One is an apple and the other is an orange. The Bible speaks clearly about each of these conflicts. Of the Spiritual, the Bible informs the Christian to put on their spiritual armor and offers an offensive weapon, the sword of the SpiritGods Word. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places (Ephesians 6:12). Beloved, I urge you as aliens and strangers to abstain from fleshly lusts which wage war against the soul (1 Peter 2:11). These are only a couple of verses that state what we all know and agree on: we are in a spiritual conflict!
But do not be so foolish as to believe we are not also in a physical conflict. To deny that would be to invite due criticism. First, let me begin my argument by confirming that I loathe violence and long for the return of Christ, who is both Lord and Savior of all who believe in him. One day the need for armies will be non-existential. Unfortunately, that day has not arrived. As it now stands, there are those in the world that would strike you down for as little as a piece of bread or for as much as a worldly ideology. The need for physical security and stability in the world is a paramount for civilization!
Consider what you would do if someone were to invade your family members home, steal all of his possessions and take him, his wife, and all his children. If it were in your power you would everything possible to pursue that person and take back your familyeven if you had to use violence. Maybe you would not? I can tell you a man who did: Abraham (read Genesis 14:12-16). But you might argue, The OT spiritual standards were incomplete, and hence not applicable to people who believe in Jesus! (Digout #25). Jesus said, Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad (John 8:56). The prophets also believed in Jesus and searched diligently for his coming (1 Peter 1:10-12). So comparing the OT with the NT in this scenario is fruitless.
But the need for protection doesnt only apply to ones home, it applies to the nation as well. Have you not read that secular government was instituted by God and that whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves (Romans 13:2)? Why has God ordained government? Because a sinful world needs stability and government is a minister of God for you
an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil (Rom. 13:4).
Now dont think that I am condoning the unrighteous abuse of government. The world is full of ungodly men that use government as a means to promote their own selfish ideology. For this very purpose it is necessary for godly men to control the government, or at least work to keep it in check. Likewise, it is imperative for Christians to saturate the ranks of our military. What if there were no Christians in our military? It would be void of righteous decisions. It would be a merciless army awaiting a leader to rise to power and willing to execute ungodly orders. There would be no checks and balances. Not only would they point the weapons of destruction outward, but they would be willing to turn on their own fellow citizens. Indeed, it would turn into war thirsty machinery (Digout, #14).
Digout, do you not plan to die by a sword? Neither did James, but he died by the sword; so did John the Baptist (Matthew 14:10; Acts 12:2). So did Paul, according to tradition. Therefore, is it not possible that you have misinterpreted what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 26:51-56? Jesus told the servant to Put your sword back into its place (v. 52; BTW, John identifies the servant as Peter, Jn. 18:10). In other words, this is not the place to use the sword, this is a spiritual matter, and How then will the Scriptures be fulfilled, which say that it must happen this way? So this was a spiritual battle.
It has been pointed out by Yekcidmij (#5) about the cases of the two Centurions. The first came to Jesus and asked for help, the other sent for Peter to explain salvation. Digout replied, But they were not recognized as saints! (#9). And so you, Digout, assume that these men did not believe, or have faith in Christ. That is ironic since in the same post you accuse someone else of making an assumption. But what does the Bible say about these Soldiers?
In Luke 7
1. He loved his sick servant. (2)
2. He loved Israel and even built a synagogue for them. (5)
3. He acknowledged his own unworthiness and addressed Jesus as Lord. (6-7)
4. Placed confidence in the power and words of Jesus; His faith amazed Jesus, who said, I say to you, not even in Israel have I found such great faith. (8-9)
It seems to me that this centurion was truly a believer! That makes him a Christian; that makes him a saint. And what of Cornelius in Acts 10?
1. He was a devout man, who feared God, gave money to the poor of Israel, and prayed continually. (10; wow, if only Christians today were that committed!)
2. He obeyed God by sending his servants to get Peter. (8)
3. His servants described him as a righteous and God fearing man. (22)
4. When he heard the truth of the Gospel of Jesus, he believed and the Holy Spirit came upon him and he was baptized
just like every other Christian is supposed to be. (44-48)
Again, it is clear that this centurion was a true believer. You infer that these two men just walked away from their positions in the Roman army. First of all, they wouldnt have lived very long if they had deserted. Second, if they would have been martyrs it is unlikely that the writers would not have mentioned it. Third, if you assume that these men deserted their posts or did not actually believe because of a lack of the bible said so, we could easily go the other way and say that the bible didnt say otherwise. In fact, in context, it is more easily acceptable to infer that these men followed Christ while remaining in their professions after these events.
Lastly, I want to address the rubber stamping of ones argument with a Christian cliché in order to add value to ones side of an issue, even if it doesnt necessarily add to the conversation. Here is how 98cwitr validates the pacifistic view: Contemporary misconception, as is with many, is that by Grace we are still allowed to sin deliberately and grace will simply and continually cover those sins...Bible says otherwise. And yet you are so patriotic with your American flag icon! How ironic, you condemn me and yet you pay me to fight for your liberty.
I asked you, Digout, to expound on the Scriptures you have set forth for your argument. What part of the Sermon on the Mount addresses the salvation (or lack of) of a Soldier? Is it Matthew 7:1? Truly enough, the preaching of Jesus Christ is easy to understand, but I dont think you understand how to use it for your argument.
Aye...solider first though right?
